Sarah Barnard | Film Annotation 10 | Energy Crossroads 1. Title, director and release year Energy Crossroads | Tiroir A Films Productions | 2007 2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film? “Human beings are the biggest agent of change on this planet.” Energy Crossroads is a film that repeats this phrase multiple times, reminding us that the changes taking place on Earth right now are of our own making. The film focuses mainly on energy consumption and its contribution to humans’ footprint on our planet, which has tripled since 1961. The first half of the film presents the audience with a wide range of sustainability problems related to our energy usage, while the second half presents some viable solutions to solving this matrix of problems. Not just another “the world is ending” documentary, Energy Crossroads gives hope that, with enough effort, humans can change, and reduce our dependence on non-renewable sources for energy. 3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out? Energy Crossroads gives a general overview of many of the problems surrounding energy consumption, particularly in the United States. Unfortunately, it presents these problems individually, rather than as a woven matrix of issues that become entangled together. The matrix can be inferred by the viewer, however, by examining these problems individually. The problems associated with our use of energy today are numerous. Political, legal, behavioral, technological, you name it, there is some inherent problem to the current energy system. To focus specifically, however, one of the main problems is the ecological footprint that our energy use has. For example, it has taken less than 150 years for humans to extract and consume about half of all the Earth’s crude oil. Additionally, more than 85% of the energy in the United States is currently provided by fossil fuels. These have inherent ecological footprints, from air pollution to destruction of ecosystems to increases in greenhouse gases, a major contributor to global climate change. Ten of the warmest years on record on our planet have occurred in the last 14 years, and the natural variability in carbon dioxide levels is equal in millions of years to what humans have changed in a matter of only hundreds of years. The film points out that we can’t expect climate to act in a simple linear fashion, and our strong dependence on fossil fuels will continue to have large impacts on our climate system. Another large problem associated with energy consumption is economic. An excellent example is the Arab Oil Embargo of the early 1970s, when there was a loss of 5% of the total oil available to the US. Gas stations ran dry, factories closed, and airlines cut flights, all largely affecting the national economy. Gas prices also skyrocketed with damage to a few oil tankers during Hurricane Katrina. The economy is extremely vulnerable to small changes in oil availability, as well as other energy means. Non-renewable resources, rapidly approaching peak production, could result in a major energy crisis. This is closely tied to political issues regarding energy, in that we have not learned from our mistakes. Little governmental action has been taken in the 40 years since the Arab Oil Embargo to recognize these energy problems. Additionally, many energy conservation policies have to be implemented at the local and state levels, because the proposals simply cannot pass at the federal level. While technological problems drive the adherence to non-renewable versus renewable energy sources, a final major sustainability problem is behavioral and cultural. The present quality of life has had no equal in human history for many parts of the world, and the American quality of life continues to rise. As other countries begin industrializing, they strive for the same quality of life Americans have, yet they cannot reach it in the same way and remain sustainable. Cheap energy has come to be seen as an “American birthright,” and when the United States uses 25% of the world’s energy with only 5% of the world’s population, that is a major problem. The cultural and psychological habits that Americans have gotten themselves into will be very difficult to break, but without doing so, our energy consumption will result in drastic consequences. 4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? The second half of Energy Crossroads, focused on possible solutions to some of the problems related to energy, was extremely compelling. It was finally an optimistic end to a film, and it really got across the point that “human beings are the biggest agent of change on this planet.” It gives hope that since human beings are what have created the problems, that it is quite possible for us to change them. The film gave a large variety of possible solutions to the problems, and there were a few things that were quite persuasive in them. One was recognizing that our energy doesn’t have to come from only one or two forms, but that we can implement a mixture of wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, and others to meet our needs. It was also really compelling that the film recognized some of the problems associated with many of the solutions, admitting that no solution is perfect and that we are still working to advance. Many of the other films we have seen propose one “perfect” solution, but this film is more realistic in recognizing the problems we still face even with new technologies. The recognition of the economic impacts was also persuasive, that not only scientists but economists as well are focused on these problems. Finally, the section on the New Belgium Brewery in Fort Collins, Colorado, was also very compelling, proving that small steps really can make a big difference. Not only has the company minimized their environmental footprint, but they have really created a better work environment all around for their employees. These human interest pieces are much more persuasive than simply mind-numbing numeral statistics. 5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? While there were many good facts throughout Energy Crossroads, I was not as compelled by the first half of the movie where they show many of the problems related to energy. These problems were shown as very brief overviews on a large number of topics, most of which is general information we have already learned about previously in another film or in class. It does not do much to convince people of these problems, but rather presents them as a reminder of the problems we are facing as a preface to the solutions they would like to present. The problems are presented individually, and I think they could have been presented more as the entangled matrix that we have learned about throughout the semester. The large amount of oil we use daily is not simply related to culture, but also to politics, economics, and the environment. The general nature of the facts presented was compelling to me personally, but I do not feel that the film would do a very good job convincing those who do not already believe that what we are seeing are actually problems. I believe the first half of the film could have been more compelling in trying to convince others of the importance of the problems, but it would be hard to do so without becoming overly preachy. 6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.? Energy Crossroads compels me to research some additional companies like the Brewery that have taken an active interest in reducing energy consumption one step at a time. This furthers the idea that problems can be solved one step at a time, and it is interesting to see the small scale steps individuals can take to make a difference. I would also like to look deeper into renewable energy sources and see how much research is being done to integrate multiple technologies together to create a sustainable system, versus how much corporate greed lies in the companies striving to make money off a “renewable energy fad.” 7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems? I believe that the film might be targeted at individuals who don’t have a large database of knowledge about sustainability problems, but that it is probably more successful with a slightly more knowledgeable audience. This film was very compelling to me because I already had a background in the ideas from previous discussions in class, and it was very good to see some possible solutions and a sense of optimism. I’m not sure, however, that it would be successful in convincing those who don’t already believe in the information being presented. To those that accept these facts, it is likely to change the way people think about the problems associated with energy consumption, and possibly convince people to look deeper into new, renewable sources of energy. 8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film? Energy Crossroads is the first film to suggest multiple points of intervention and multiple solutions to the problems associated with energy consumption. The first, and possibly most important step, is to recognize that we have a problem. Before we can begin dealing with it, we must recognize that we are facing a large problem and realize the need to accept responsibility. Electric power solutions included wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass fuel sources, in combination, to help move away from oil, natural gas, and coal. Transportation fuels can also move away from gasoline, but we can’t try to substitute biofuel for gasoline in a one-to-one ratio. We must recognize the limits and move forward toward more viable biofuels such as ethanol from wildgrass or woodchips, as well as looking into the hydrogen sector, even if it won’t be ready for another few decades. Redesigning our vehicles was another possible solution, realizing that standard cars are no more efficient than they were when Henry Ford began building them over 80 years ago. The film continues with some additional points of intervention, but continuously keeps its emphasis on no single, perfect solution, and constantly reminds us that “Human beings are the biggest agent of change on this planet.” 9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? I think that something the film could have added to enhance the educational value is some educational initiatives. The film talks a lot about changing the way our cultural behaves and the psychological and physical habits we have gotten into, and it seems that a good way to begin changing these behaviors is through education. From grade school to college, sustainable educational initiatives could help to teach up-and-coming generations new ways to think about the way we interact with our environment. While the film proposed some excellent solutions, it did not focus on how we can get to that point, and some additional information on this topic may have enhanced Energy Crossroads’ educational value.
1. Title, director and release year
Energy Crossroads | Tiroir A Films Productions | 2007
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
“Human beings are the biggest agent of change on this planet.” Energy Crossroads is a film that repeats this phrase multiple times, reminding us that the changes taking place on Earth right now are of our own making. The film focuses mainly on energy consumption and its contribution to humans’ footprint on our planet, which has tripled since 1961. The first half of the film presents the audience with a wide range of sustainability problems related to our energy usage, while the second half presents some viable solutions to solving this matrix of problems. Not just another “the world is ending” documentary, Energy Crossroads gives hope that, with enough effort, humans can change, and reduce our dependence on non-renewable sources for energy.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Energy Crossroads gives a general overview of many of the problems surrounding energy consumption, particularly in the United States. Unfortunately, it presents these problems individually, rather than as a woven matrix of issues that become entangled together. The matrix can be inferred by the viewer, however, by examining these problems individually.
The problems associated with our use of energy today are numerous. Political, legal, behavioral, technological, you name it, there is some inherent problem to the current energy system. To focus specifically, however, one of the main problems is the ecological footprint that our energy use has. For example, it has taken less than 150 years for humans to extract and consume about half of all the Earth’s crude oil. Additionally, more than 85% of the energy in the United States is currently provided by fossil fuels. These have inherent ecological footprints, from air pollution to destruction of ecosystems to increases in greenhouse gases, a major contributor to global climate change. Ten of the warmest years on record on our planet have occurred in the last 14 years, and the natural variability in carbon dioxide levels is equal in millions of years to what humans have changed in a matter of only hundreds of years. The film points out that we can’t expect climate to act in a simple linear fashion, and our strong dependence on fossil fuels will continue to have large impacts on our climate system.
Another large problem associated with energy consumption is economic. An excellent example is the Arab Oil Embargo of the early 1970s, when there was a loss of 5% of the total oil available to the US. Gas stations ran dry, factories closed, and airlines cut flights, all largely affecting the national economy. Gas prices also skyrocketed with damage to a few oil tankers during Hurricane Katrina. The economy is extremely vulnerable to small changes in oil availability, as well as other energy means. Non-renewable resources, rapidly approaching peak production, could result in a major energy crisis. This is closely tied to political issues regarding energy, in that we have not learned from our mistakes. Little governmental action has been taken in the 40 years since the Arab Oil Embargo to recognize these energy problems. Additionally, many energy conservation policies have to be implemented at the local and state levels, because the proposals simply cannot pass at the federal level.
While technological problems drive the adherence to non-renewable versus renewable energy sources, a final major sustainability problem is behavioral and cultural. The present quality of life has had no equal in human history for many parts of the world, and the American quality of life continues to rise. As other countries begin industrializing, they strive for the same quality of life Americans have, yet they cannot reach it in the same way and remain sustainable. Cheap energy has come to be seen as an “American birthright,” and when the United States uses 25% of the world’s energy with only 5% of the world’s population, that is a major problem. The cultural and psychological habits that Americans have gotten themselves into will be very difficult to break, but without doing so, our energy consumption will result in drastic consequences.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The second half of Energy Crossroads, focused on possible solutions to some of the problems related to energy, was extremely compelling. It was finally an optimistic end to a film, and it really got across the point that “human beings are the biggest agent of change on this planet.” It gives hope that since human beings are what have created the problems, that it is quite possible for us to change them. The film gave a large variety of possible solutions to the problems, and there were a few things that were quite persuasive in them. One was recognizing that our energy doesn’t have to come from only one or two forms, but that we can implement a mixture of wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, and others to meet our needs. It was also really compelling that the film recognized some of the problems associated with many of the solutions, admitting that no solution is perfect and that we are still working to advance. Many of the other films we have seen propose one “perfect” solution, but this film is more realistic in recognizing the problems we still face even with new technologies. The recognition of the economic impacts was also persuasive, that not only scientists but economists as well are focused on these problems. Finally, the section on the New Belgium Brewery in Fort Collins, Colorado, was also very compelling, proving that small steps really can make a big difference. Not only has the company minimized their environmental footprint, but they have really created a better work environment all around for their employees. These human interest pieces are much more persuasive than simply mind-numbing numeral statistics.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
While there were many good facts throughout Energy Crossroads, I was not as compelled by the first half of the movie where they show many of the problems related to energy. These problems were shown as very brief overviews on a large number of topics, most of which is general information we have already learned about previously in another film or in class. It does not do much to convince people of these problems, but rather presents them as a reminder of the problems we are facing as a preface to the solutions they would like to present. The problems are presented individually, and I think they could have been presented more as the entangled matrix that we have learned about throughout the semester. The large amount of oil we use daily is not simply related to culture, but also to politics, economics, and the environment. The general nature of the facts presented was compelling to me personally, but I do not feel that the film would do a very good job convincing those who do not already believe that what we are seeing are actually problems. I believe the first half of the film could have been more compelling in trying to convince others of the importance of the problems, but it would be hard to do so without becoming overly preachy.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
Energy Crossroads compels me to research some additional companies like the Brewery that have taken an active interest in reducing energy consumption one step at a time. This furthers the idea that problems can be solved one step at a time, and it is interesting to see the small scale steps individuals can take to make a difference. I would also like to look deeper into renewable energy sources and see how much research is being done to integrate multiple technologies together to create a sustainable system, versus how much corporate greed lies in the companies striving to make money off a “renewable energy fad.”
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
I believe that the film might be targeted at individuals who don’t have a large database of knowledge about sustainability problems, but that it is probably more successful with a slightly more knowledgeable audience. This film was very compelling to me because I already had a background in the ideas from previous discussions in class, and it was very good to see some possible solutions and a sense of optimism. I’m not sure, however, that it would be successful in convincing those who don’t already believe in the information being presented. To those that accept these facts, it is likely to change the way people think about the problems associated with energy consumption, and possibly convince people to look deeper into new, renewable sources of energy.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
Energy Crossroads is the first film to suggest multiple points of intervention and multiple solutions to the problems associated with energy consumption. The first, and possibly most important step, is to recognize that we have a problem. Before we can begin dealing with it, we must recognize that we are facing a large problem and realize the need to accept responsibility. Electric power solutions included wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass fuel sources, in combination, to help move away from oil, natural gas, and coal. Transportation fuels can also move away from gasoline, but we can’t try to substitute biofuel for gasoline in a one-to-one ratio. We must recognize the limits and move forward toward more viable biofuels such as ethanol from wildgrass or woodchips, as well as looking into the hydrogen sector, even if it won’t be ready for another few decades. Redesigning our vehicles was another possible solution, realizing that standard cars are no more efficient than they were when Henry Ford began building them over 80 years ago. The film continues with some additional points of intervention, but continuously keeps its emphasis on no single, perfect solution, and constantly reminds us that “Human beings are the biggest agent of change on this planet.”
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
I think that something the film could have added to enhance the educational value is some educational initiatives. The film talks a lot about changing the way our cultural behaves and the psychological and physical habits we have gotten into, and it seems that a good way to begin changing these behaviors is through education. From grade school to college, sustainable educational initiatives could help to teach up-and-coming generations new ways to think about the way we interact with our environment. While the film proposed some excellent solutions, it did not focus on how we can get to that point, and some additional information on this topic may have enhanced Energy Crossroads’ educational value.